8 Questions for Biblical Counselors Who Are Against Clinically-Informed Biblical Counseling (CIBC)

My Biblical Counseling Approach

First, I do not use “clinically-informed” or “trauma-informed” for my approach to biblical counseling. Instead, I describe my biblical counseling model as: Gospel-Centered/Christ-Centered, Theologically-Saturated, Relationship-Focused, Church History-Informed, Research-Aware Soul Physician of Embodied-Souls.

For why I don’t use the labels Clinically-Informed Biblical Counseling or Trauma-Informed Biblical Counseling see, Why I Don’t Call Myself a “Clinically-Informed Biblical Counselor” (CIBC).

My Thoughts on CIBC

Second, I deeply respect my CIBC brothers and sisters in Christ. I also encourage/challenge my CIBC brothers and sisters with questions like these.

How do we assure that our biblical counseling is being transformed by the Word of God rather than being conformed to the ways of the world?

Are we theologically-saturated-informed biblical counselors? Or, are we theologically-shallow-conformed biblical counselors?

Questions for Anti-CIBC Biblical Counselors

Third, I have a series of biblical/theological questions for biblical counselors who disapprove of CIBC. Anti-CIBC biblical counselors make a lot of assertions about CIBC leaders. It seems fair, wise, and biblical that anti-CIBC thinkers respond to some iron sharpening questions.

For additional feedback to anti-CIBC thinkers, see, Non-Clinically-Informed Biblical Counseling: 2 Reflections and 4 Recommendations.

Question 1: CIBC and Adams, Bettler, and Powlison.

On the 25^th anniversary of the launch of the nouthetic counseling movement, Jay Adams, John Bettler, and David Powlison dialogued about how nouthetic counseling engages with secular psychology. Instead of saying that nouthetic counseling rejects secular psychology, they used 6 “R” words, explaining that nouthetic counseling recycles, reinterprets, reshapes, reconciles, redeems, and recasts secular psychology.

Question #1: Since CIBC uses God’s Word to assess extra-biblical information, how is CIBC’s approach different from Adams, Bettler, and Powlison who recycle, reinterpret, reshape, reconcile, redeem, and recast secular psychology?

Question 2: CIBC and Informed Nouthetic Counseling.

Historically, the modern nouthetic counseling movement has always been INC: Informed Nouthetic Counseling:

BINC: Behaviorism-Informed Nouthetic Counseling
NINC: Neuroscience-Informed Nouthetic Counseling
SINC: Science-Informed Nouthetic Counseling
PINC: Psychology-Informed Nouthetic Counseling
CGINC: Common Grace-Informed Nouthetic Counseling
CBRINC: Co-Belligerent-Research-Informed Nouthetic Counseling

Question #2: How is the CIBC approach of using God’s Word to evaluate extra-biblical information different from modern informed nouthetic counseling?

Question 3: ACBC and the Reformed Teaching on Common Grace.

The ACBC’s Journal of Biblical Soul Care approved and published Francine Tan’s article in which she proposes “that biblical counselors ought to revisit how we define CG and make a few qualifications to the traditional Reformed view of CG” (84). Therefore:

Question #3: Is it not ACBC’s view of common grace that is new, novel, and not in alignment with the biblical and Reformed theology of common grace?

Question 4: Reformed Theologians and Extra-Biblical Resources.

Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til all consistently affirmed the use of extra-biblical sources, including secular philosophy and secular psychology.

Question #4: How do you distinguish Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til’s use of the scriptural lens to assess and potentially use extra-biblical sources from how CIBC uses the scriptural lens to assess extra-biblical sources?

Two follow-up questions:

Or, do you deem Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til to be integrationists?

Or, do you agree that CIBC aligns with Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til in their use of the lens of Scripture to assess and potentially use extra-biblical resources?

Question 5: Interpreted Data.

All biblical counselors agree that researchers interpret data. All biblical counselors agree that Christians use the Scriptures to assess and evaluate extra-biblical information.

Question #5: Is not the noetic effect of saving grace such that a redeemed biblical counselor has the ability to use God’s all-sufficient Word to evaluate data interpretation gleaned from research done by unregenerate persons?

Here are additional research continuum questions:

How does the noetic effect of sin impact how an unredeemed neuroscientist interprets research data related to the physical brain and brain cancer treatment?
How does the noetic effect of sin impact how an unredeemed neuroscientist interprets research data related to the physical brain, neuroplasticity, and stroke recovery?
How does the noetic effect of sin impact how an unredeemed neuroscientist interprets research data related to the physical brain and fear, anxiety, phobias, panic, and OCD?
Is the noetic effect of sin such that these fallen researchers cannot draw any helpful interpretations from the data about brain cancer treatment, stroke recovery, and/or the physical brain’s interaction with emotions like fear?

Here are additional summary theology questions:

Why pit God’s sovereign common grace against God’s sovereign saving grace?
Why pit research from natural revelation against God’s truth revealed in special revelation?
Why not use special revelation to assess data interpretation derived from common grace (which is what CIBC leaders seek to do)?

Question 6: The Noetic Effect of God’s Sovereign Common Grace.

The Bible and Reformed theology address both the noetic effect of common grace and the noetic effect of total depravity. It is the noetic effect of God’s common grace that sovereignly enlightens the unregenerate person to understand any truth, to make any contribution to culture, to observe any fact accurately (though imperfectly and finitely), and to interpret any fact correctly (though imperfectly and finitely).

Question #6:In thinking about extra-biblical information, observations, and interpretations from unredeemed persons, do you factor in the noetic effect of God’s common grace, or do you only focus on the antithesis—the noetic effect of total depravity?

Here is a practical biblical counseling follow-up question:

How does the noetic effect of God’s sovereign common grace impact how an unredeemed neuroscientist interprets research data related to the physical brain and fear, anxiety, phobias, panic, and OCD?

Question 7: Romans 1 and Romans 2.

Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til all exegete Romans 1 and Romans 2 to mean that fallen image bearers cannot fully suppress the knowledge of God revealed in creation, nor can they fully suppress the moral law of God implanted in their conscience. Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til all apply Romans 1 and 2, along with their theology of God’s sovereign common grace, to explain why unredeemed people can come to valid conclusions.

Question #7: What implications do you make for biblical counseling and extra-biblical information from Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til using the theology of Romans 1 and 2 to explain why unregenerate persons can make valid observations and come to valid conclusions?

Two follow-up questions would ask:

In your mind, does this mean that Calvin, Kuyper, Bavinck, and Van Til were integrationists?
In thinking about biblical counseling and extra-biblical information, do you only factor in the antithesis, or do you also factor in the imago Dei, common grace, and the ongoing consciousness of God’s moral order?

Question 8: Nouthetic Cautions About Critiques of Others

Nearly forty years ago (in 1987) John Bettler provided three cautions about nouthetic critiques of others. Based upon Bettler’s 1987 critique:

Question 8: Do you fairly and accurately present what CIBC leaders actually say and teach about biblical counseling?

Based on Bettler’s article, here are some general questions that people who are anti-CIBC could be asking themselves today.

Do you highlight only your perceived negatives of the counseling positions of CIBC leaders, or do you seek also to highlight the strengths of their counseling positions?
Do you strive in all integrity to represent the counseling views of CIBC leaders, not in their worst light, but in their best possible light?
Do you know and present the counseling views of CIBC leaders not in a caricature, but in actuality and reality?

Based on Bettler’s article, here are additional more specific follow-up questions:

The biblical counseling faculty of SEBTS detailed Ten Commitments of Redemptive Counselors/Clinically-Informed Biblical Counselors. Since these leaders are believers, you are not simply dealing with God’s sovereign common grace in their lives; you are dealing with God’s sovereign saving grace in their regenerated minds and hearts.

Do you engage with the most robust presentations of CIBC leaders?
What are the strengths of their Redemptive Counseling model that you can humbly learn from?
If you see weaknesses or concerns, what specific biblical/theological evidence can you present that engages those concerns?

Brad Hambrick recently penned the article, What I Mean by Clinically-Informed Biblical Counseling.

Do you engage with the specific beliefs of CIBC leaders, accurately characterizing what they believe?
What are the strengths of Hambrick’s approach that you can humbly learn from?
If you see weaknesses or concerns in Hambrick’s approach, what specific biblical/theological evidence can you present that engages those concerns?

Collating the 8 Primary Questions

Question #2: How is the CIBC approach of using God’s Word to evaluate extra-biblical information different from modern informed nouthetic counseling?

Question #3: Is it not ACBC’s view of common grace that is new, novel, and not in alignment with the biblical and Reformed theology of common grace?

Question #6: In thinking about extra-biblical information, observations, and interpretations from unredeemed persons, do you factor in the noetic effect of God’s common grace, or do you only focus on the antithesis—the noetic effect of total depravity?

Question 8: Do you fairly and accurately present what CIBC leaders actually say and teach about biblical counseling?

Join the Iron Sharpening Conversation

What additional questions would you ask of people who are anti-CIBC?

What questions would you ask of CIBC leaders?